Welcome to Conflict of interest Noticeboard (COIN) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Sections older than 14 days
archived by
Lowercase sigmabot III.
| ||||
You must notify any editor who is the subject of a discussion. You may use {{
subst:coin-notice}} ~~~~ to do so.
| ||||
| ||||
Additional notes:
| ||||
| ||||
To begin a new discussion, enter the name of the relevant article below:
|
Search the COI noticeboard archives |
Help answer requested edits |
Category:Wikipedia conflict of interest edit requests is where COI editors have placed the {{
edit COI}} template:
|
International Churches of Christ is again the subject of COI editing. JamieBrown2011's COI has previously been discussed at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard/Archive 203#International Churches of Christ. Meta Voyager is part of "a congregation that operates independently, but has a relationship with the International Churches of Christ", as described here. JamieBrown2011 has today removed material critical of the church from the article and added mention of the testimony of a witness saying that church isn't a cult, the inclusion of which was previously discussed at Talk:International Churches of Christ#RfC on Singapore court case and lacked consensus. Cordless Larry ( talk) 21:45, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
I've added Psmidi, an SPA with a COI who showed up on the article talk page today, several years after their last edit. It wouldn't surprise me if off-Wikipedia co-ordination between ICOC members was going on here. Cordless Larry ( talk) 19:39, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
Initially, I sensed something was off when I noticed they were inserting self published primary source references into may articles, such as plaskett.family and adding tourism guide like contents. COI was suspected, because they were single handedly responsible for the insertion of the overwhelming majority of that self published personal website blog reference. They've created the article White Stag Leadership Development Program and when I searched articles containing sourcing to Whitestag.org and ran a Wikiblame check for insertion of whitestag.org (such as this example and this 2022 example out of many) I found that btphelps was responsible for most of them. Further research found strong evidence of long term advocacy editing and likely undisclosed paid editing. I've given them a chance to explain, but after a few days, no response. Per Wikipedia policy on outing, I can not name the evidence here, however per the protocol, private evidence has been emailed to Wikipedia functionaries. Graywalls ( talk) 06:49, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
Ok, so I can now say btphelps is a co-director of White Stag, per their self reveal as they have not had it redacted/oversighted. White stag was founded by Béla H. Bánáthy. Extensively writing about their own organization as well as those closely associated with it and inserting links to contents to the organization they direct as references to numerous related articles is a COI behavior. Graywalls ( talk) 18:53, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
This is a serious allegation and you should be prepared to provide solid evidence.since you have not directly introduced yourself by your identity outside of Wikipedia, I have to be careful with what can be posted here since posting anything that connects user name to real life identity is strictly prohibited, unless you explicitly authorize. Even then, I'd feel more comfortable if you introduced yourself first (strictly optional though) before I post it. Graywalls ( talk) 13:52, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
I am going to be AFK until next week. Just an FYI, I just posted this: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Graywalls reported by User:Evrik (Result:_) -- evrik ( talk) 03:55, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
This is also something to look at: Talk:Leadership_training_(Boy_Scouts_of_America)#Pinetreeweb_and_other_non-RS. Btphelps disclosed they're the author of that contents on pinetreeweb. @ SandyGeorgia: Graywalls ( talk) 15:53, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Please also see discussion of GA reassessment at Talk:Béla_H._Bánáthy/GA2 Graywalls ( talk) 15:58, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
WP:COI's def is so broad and vague that it can be easily capitalized on by someone with an axe to grind. Saying there is a COI on someone who has been dead since 2003 is certainly outside the intent of wp:coi. North8000 ( talk) 16:00, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
@ Btphelps:, We haven't heard you comment in a while Do you give permission for editors to publicly share evidence found off-wiki in this discussion even though it may reveal your identity and/or your affiliation with various organizations? Without your explicit consent, those details can't be shared here. Graywalls ( talk) 09:45, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
FYI the company WikiExperts which was banned in 2013 has a new website and is offering services to academics. They claim to follow Wiki policies and I can't show any specific edits from them but if there was a previous ban maybe it's worth investigating. Disclosure: I work as the Wikipedian in residence for NIHR, editing with a separate account. Adam Harangozó ( talk) 09:26, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
Edit history for Jay Kenechukwu is self-evident, though this is what caught my attention [1]. Ibru family article especially could use a going-over from non-affiliated editors, what with its scrapbook-like photos of non-notable family and their business holdings. Many peripheral edits have been to add Ibru family members to other articles--the impression is that of an account here primarily on the family's behalf. Not so sure about removal of cite tags at Egbert Udo Udoma, or mass deletion of cats here [2], either. There may be an affiliation between the two accounts. 2601:19E:4180:6D50:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 ( talk) 19:12, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
I doubt anything significant will come of this, but I might as well post it just in case. I came across this listing on Craigslist: Long-time Wikipedia contributor needed. The post avoids including any specific information, so perhaps this is only useful as a warning, but there may be a reason to look out for possible issues in new articles on nonprofit founders (as if there weren't enough reasons already). — 烏Γ ( kaw) │ 23:04, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
the story is only documented in court records") won't get very far. Schazjmd (talk) 23:09, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
I’ve raised an issue relating to possible conflict-of-interest regarding the IP range which Wikipedia links to the European Parliament off-wiki. I’m a bit confused by it, as the IP has disruptively edited articles regarding scandals about the parliament and its members. The talk page says the IP’s edits are monitored, but I can’t seem to find anything in the archives about any action that’s ever been taken. The IP address is 136.173.162.129 It can be found here: https://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=13474
Do I need to put the COI notice on the IP’s talk page, even though Wikipedia is already aware of this as they link the IP to the parliament on its talk page?
I will not notify the forum of this notice as per WP:STEALTH. TheSpacebook ( talk) 21:18, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
User was previous blocked for promotional edits and has never declared COI. Later admitted "work[ing] with the PR team of Badshah". Northern Moonlight 01:52, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
Undeclared COI (possibly paid) editing in the subject article, and then post-declaration, continues to make clearly contentious and clearly promotional/advertorial edits in contravention of COI policy.
Also, copyright infingement from:
https://www.capitaland.com/en/about-capitaland/who-we-are.html.
Melmann 09:28, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
Partial listing of involved pages and users. More can be identified by following Serious Modi's page move activity.
I first became aware of Serious Modi when they moved [[Draft::Shruti Reddy]] from draftspace to mainspace and removed a COI template I had placed without addressing any COI in the article Special:Permalink/1218665391. The article had been written by ShamiBeldee, who had placed a paid editor notice on their page, so the coi notice on the article was appropriate, as no one else had edited it.
I then looked at Serious Modi's edit history some more, and found some odd issues. This user is very new (10 days old), and has been engaged in some very sophisticated Wikipedia actions. Also, the user has a pattern of taking a draft article written by another user and, as the first interaction with the article, moving it to mainspace. There's a partial listing above. It appears as if the user is supervising a group of paid editors, including the properly declared paid editor ShamiBeldee.
I placed a level 1 unpaid editor warning on the user's talk page April 12, with no response but continued editing. I placed a level 2 warning on April 15, also with no response. Steve Quinn has also expressed concern about this user.— rsjaffe 🗣️ 20:04, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
"if you place this tag, you should promptly start a discussion on the article's talk page to explain what is non-neutral about the article. If you do not start a discussion, any editor will be justified in removing the tag without warning."Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:02, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
Adding their information and external links to the article. Myrealnamm ( 💬talk · ✏️contribs) at 01:02, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
Seems like Paul B. Murphy was on a shopping spree and paid multiple UPEs to recreate a biography about him when it was deleted in September 2023 ( Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paul B. Murphy Jr.). Another case of how big pockets are spamming Wikipedia (and now they have two genuine pages from two different users without any COI disclosure, i.e. Paul B Murphy Jr. and Paul B. Murphy). Maybe deal these two pages under a new WP:AFD? 2A02:1210:5067:B100:49C5:B23F:AD36:AB87 ( talk) 21:40, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
"uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. 'soft deletion'). Editors can request the article's undeletion.". Where is the prior discussion with the editors you have named? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:49, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Hkc345 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Hkc345 (a disclosed paid editor) created the Jorge Suárez (pianist) page, which I accepted at Articles for Creation. Soon after, a Spanish translation, at es:Jorge Suárez (pianista) was created by Belarti, who has also edited the page in enwiki. The problem is that Hkc345 also edited the Spanish page without disclosing his paid editor status, which is prohibited by the ToU (and seemingly eswiki's CoI guideline, though I have to rely on Google translate for that). Since there may be intacracies to eswiki's rules I've missed, and also because I suspect Hkc is a native Spanish speaker who has English as a second language, I wonder if any bilingual editors could help me out? Keep in mind Hanlon's razor.
Cheers, Mach61 13:06, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Turned the article into a puff-piece, and continued to do so after being asked to declare a COI. One edit summary reads "We added fourteen new cited link clicks (from sources verifying Susan's credibility from Vogue to People Magazine and many more). Please make sure and update on your end, that her Wikipedia page is providing the articles and citations you requested. Please remove the 'multiple issues' that were marked back in 2011. Thanks in advance." (note the "We"). Shortly afterwards, the maintenance templates were removed by the same editor. 2A00:23C5:50E8:EE01:79FB:BC74:BEDF:FF0C ( talk) 20:06, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Sock- or meatpuppets, adding copyvio or inadequately paraphrased material from the IMGT website. Turned the article from a perfectly serviceable page on the organisation to a sales presentation. 2A00:23C5:50E8:EE01:79FB:BC74:BEDF:FF0C ( talk) 20:12, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Account and IP are likely the same user. Repeatedly turning the article into an advertisement [24] [25] with poorly paraphrased copy-and-pastes from the subject's website and adding alumni with no Wikipedia article. 2A00:23C5:50E8:EE01:79FB:BC74:BEDF:FF0C ( talk) 20:18, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
This IP is currently blocked for a day and a half. They are clearly the subject or their representative, and have turned Nick Jordan (artist) and, to a lesser extent, Jacob Cartwright and Nick Jordan into resumé/advert/lots and lots of extraneous trivial detail pieces. Yesterday they started repeatedly replacing the article with a copyvio sales pitch, which is what got them the 31 hour block. Given they started turning the article in January 2021, I'm pretty sure they will return to it when the block expires, so extra eyes would be useful. 2A00:23C5:50E8:EE01:79FB:BC74:BEDF:FF0C ( talk) 10:20, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
UPE Judokitty ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has added a lot of crap on Mi-Young Park. Please help cleanup this biography. UPE has been commissioned for this task Talk:Craig Kielburger as well. 61.254.242.80 ( talk) 22:16, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
I edit mostly in WP Climbing. A badly written BLP for non-notable climbers Iulia and Delia was turned down at AfC (i saw it when the WikiProj Climbing tag was added). It then reappeared as a more professional article (photo, editing standard etc.) but still non-notable per WP:CLIMBER. The creator of this new-and-improved version User:CharlesBNB was blocked including linked accounts and articles.
It struck me that there is real asymmetry here. Once we know a non-notable BLP/Company has been declined, its reappearance in a very professionalised form (with photo, logo etc,) is likely a UPE, which then links to their wider portfolio of other articles. In fact, a UPE takes a big risk taking on a client who was previously turned down/deleted on Wikipedia, as they could lose all their work?
My question is whether we keep a register/filter of non-notable BLPs/Corps who we know are trying to get on Wikipedia and who may engage the services of a UPE provider, so that we can expose the whole provider? Aszx5000 ( talk) 12:40, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
removed referenced info from Hamza Essalih and turned it into something of a hagiography 92.17.14.64 ( talk) 12:50, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
The below user works for HCL as shown by their edit summary here
— Preceding unsigned comment added by REDACTED403 ( talk • contribs) 13:00:41 (UTC)
This user is variously using Wikipedia to promote her own work and relying on her own original research. She edited the articles for Arcadia Publishing and Castleberry, Alabama to add external links to her book. She also names herself as the author of two of the eight sources she cited in the article she created, Graefenberg Medical Institute. I don't know if the COI noticeboard is the appropriate place for this conversation but I didn't know where else to bring it. Dennis C. Abrams ( talk) 13:50, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
|publisher=
). It is not "original research" in the Wikipedia sense to include something here that one has previously had published elsewhere; we should welcome subject experts who write here neutrally (as indeed I have occasionally done). At the top of this page is "This page should only be used when ordinary talk page discussion has been attempted and failed to resolve the issue"; where did you do that? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:40, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
Welcome to Conflict of interest Noticeboard (COIN) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Sections older than 14 days
archived by
Lowercase sigmabot III.
| ||||
You must notify any editor who is the subject of a discussion. You may use {{
subst:coin-notice}} ~~~~ to do so.
| ||||
| ||||
Additional notes:
| ||||
| ||||
To begin a new discussion, enter the name of the relevant article below:
|
Search the COI noticeboard archives |
Help answer requested edits |
Category:Wikipedia conflict of interest edit requests is where COI editors have placed the {{
edit COI}} template:
|
International Churches of Christ is again the subject of COI editing. JamieBrown2011's COI has previously been discussed at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard/Archive 203#International Churches of Christ. Meta Voyager is part of "a congregation that operates independently, but has a relationship with the International Churches of Christ", as described here. JamieBrown2011 has today removed material critical of the church from the article and added mention of the testimony of a witness saying that church isn't a cult, the inclusion of which was previously discussed at Talk:International Churches of Christ#RfC on Singapore court case and lacked consensus. Cordless Larry ( talk) 21:45, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
I've added Psmidi, an SPA with a COI who showed up on the article talk page today, several years after their last edit. It wouldn't surprise me if off-Wikipedia co-ordination between ICOC members was going on here. Cordless Larry ( talk) 19:39, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
Initially, I sensed something was off when I noticed they were inserting self published primary source references into may articles, such as plaskett.family and adding tourism guide like contents. COI was suspected, because they were single handedly responsible for the insertion of the overwhelming majority of that self published personal website blog reference. They've created the article White Stag Leadership Development Program and when I searched articles containing sourcing to Whitestag.org and ran a Wikiblame check for insertion of whitestag.org (such as this example and this 2022 example out of many) I found that btphelps was responsible for most of them. Further research found strong evidence of long term advocacy editing and likely undisclosed paid editing. I've given them a chance to explain, but after a few days, no response. Per Wikipedia policy on outing, I can not name the evidence here, however per the protocol, private evidence has been emailed to Wikipedia functionaries. Graywalls ( talk) 06:49, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
Ok, so I can now say btphelps is a co-director of White Stag, per their self reveal as they have not had it redacted/oversighted. White stag was founded by Béla H. Bánáthy. Extensively writing about their own organization as well as those closely associated with it and inserting links to contents to the organization they direct as references to numerous related articles is a COI behavior. Graywalls ( talk) 18:53, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
This is a serious allegation and you should be prepared to provide solid evidence.since you have not directly introduced yourself by your identity outside of Wikipedia, I have to be careful with what can be posted here since posting anything that connects user name to real life identity is strictly prohibited, unless you explicitly authorize. Even then, I'd feel more comfortable if you introduced yourself first (strictly optional though) before I post it. Graywalls ( talk) 13:52, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
I am going to be AFK until next week. Just an FYI, I just posted this: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Graywalls reported by User:Evrik (Result:_) -- evrik ( talk) 03:55, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
This is also something to look at: Talk:Leadership_training_(Boy_Scouts_of_America)#Pinetreeweb_and_other_non-RS. Btphelps disclosed they're the author of that contents on pinetreeweb. @ SandyGeorgia: Graywalls ( talk) 15:53, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
Please also see discussion of GA reassessment at Talk:Béla_H._Bánáthy/GA2 Graywalls ( talk) 15:58, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
WP:COI's def is so broad and vague that it can be easily capitalized on by someone with an axe to grind. Saying there is a COI on someone who has been dead since 2003 is certainly outside the intent of wp:coi. North8000 ( talk) 16:00, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
@ Btphelps:, We haven't heard you comment in a while Do you give permission for editors to publicly share evidence found off-wiki in this discussion even though it may reveal your identity and/or your affiliation with various organizations? Without your explicit consent, those details can't be shared here. Graywalls ( talk) 09:45, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
FYI the company WikiExperts which was banned in 2013 has a new website and is offering services to academics. They claim to follow Wiki policies and I can't show any specific edits from them but if there was a previous ban maybe it's worth investigating. Disclosure: I work as the Wikipedian in residence for NIHR, editing with a separate account. Adam Harangozó ( talk) 09:26, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
Edit history for Jay Kenechukwu is self-evident, though this is what caught my attention [1]. Ibru family article especially could use a going-over from non-affiliated editors, what with its scrapbook-like photos of non-notable family and their business holdings. Many peripheral edits have been to add Ibru family members to other articles--the impression is that of an account here primarily on the family's behalf. Not so sure about removal of cite tags at Egbert Udo Udoma, or mass deletion of cats here [2], either. There may be an affiliation between the two accounts. 2601:19E:4180:6D50:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 ( talk) 19:12, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
I doubt anything significant will come of this, but I might as well post it just in case. I came across this listing on Craigslist: Long-time Wikipedia contributor needed. The post avoids including any specific information, so perhaps this is only useful as a warning, but there may be a reason to look out for possible issues in new articles on nonprofit founders (as if there weren't enough reasons already). — 烏Γ ( kaw) │ 23:04, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
the story is only documented in court records") won't get very far. Schazjmd (talk) 23:09, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
I’ve raised an issue relating to possible conflict-of-interest regarding the IP range which Wikipedia links to the European Parliament off-wiki. I’m a bit confused by it, as the IP has disruptively edited articles regarding scandals about the parliament and its members. The talk page says the IP’s edits are monitored, but I can’t seem to find anything in the archives about any action that’s ever been taken. The IP address is 136.173.162.129 It can be found here: https://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=13474
Do I need to put the COI notice on the IP’s talk page, even though Wikipedia is already aware of this as they link the IP to the parliament on its talk page?
I will not notify the forum of this notice as per WP:STEALTH. TheSpacebook ( talk) 21:18, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
User was previous blocked for promotional edits and has never declared COI. Later admitted "work[ing] with the PR team of Badshah". Northern Moonlight 01:52, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
Undeclared COI (possibly paid) editing in the subject article, and then post-declaration, continues to make clearly contentious and clearly promotional/advertorial edits in contravention of COI policy.
Also, copyright infingement from:
https://www.capitaland.com/en/about-capitaland/who-we-are.html.
Melmann 09:28, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
Partial listing of involved pages and users. More can be identified by following Serious Modi's page move activity.
I first became aware of Serious Modi when they moved [[Draft::Shruti Reddy]] from draftspace to mainspace and removed a COI template I had placed without addressing any COI in the article Special:Permalink/1218665391. The article had been written by ShamiBeldee, who had placed a paid editor notice on their page, so the coi notice on the article was appropriate, as no one else had edited it.
I then looked at Serious Modi's edit history some more, and found some odd issues. This user is very new (10 days old), and has been engaged in some very sophisticated Wikipedia actions. Also, the user has a pattern of taking a draft article written by another user and, as the first interaction with the article, moving it to mainspace. There's a partial listing above. It appears as if the user is supervising a group of paid editors, including the properly declared paid editor ShamiBeldee.
I placed a level 1 unpaid editor warning on the user's talk page April 12, with no response but continued editing. I placed a level 2 warning on April 15, also with no response. Steve Quinn has also expressed concern about this user.— rsjaffe 🗣️ 20:04, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
"if you place this tag, you should promptly start a discussion on the article's talk page to explain what is non-neutral about the article. If you do not start a discussion, any editor will be justified in removing the tag without warning."Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:02, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
Adding their information and external links to the article. Myrealnamm ( 💬talk · ✏️contribs) at 01:02, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
Seems like Paul B. Murphy was on a shopping spree and paid multiple UPEs to recreate a biography about him when it was deleted in September 2023 ( Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paul B. Murphy Jr.). Another case of how big pockets are spamming Wikipedia (and now they have two genuine pages from two different users without any COI disclosure, i.e. Paul B Murphy Jr. and Paul B. Murphy). Maybe deal these two pages under a new WP:AFD? 2A02:1210:5067:B100:49C5:B23F:AD36:AB87 ( talk) 21:40, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
"uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. 'soft deletion'). Editors can request the article's undeletion.". Where is the prior discussion with the editors you have named? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:49, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Hkc345 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Hkc345 (a disclosed paid editor) created the Jorge Suárez (pianist) page, which I accepted at Articles for Creation. Soon after, a Spanish translation, at es:Jorge Suárez (pianista) was created by Belarti, who has also edited the page in enwiki. The problem is that Hkc345 also edited the Spanish page without disclosing his paid editor status, which is prohibited by the ToU (and seemingly eswiki's CoI guideline, though I have to rely on Google translate for that). Since there may be intacracies to eswiki's rules I've missed, and also because I suspect Hkc is a native Spanish speaker who has English as a second language, I wonder if any bilingual editors could help me out? Keep in mind Hanlon's razor.
Cheers, Mach61 13:06, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Turned the article into a puff-piece, and continued to do so after being asked to declare a COI. One edit summary reads "We added fourteen new cited link clicks (from sources verifying Susan's credibility from Vogue to People Magazine and many more). Please make sure and update on your end, that her Wikipedia page is providing the articles and citations you requested. Please remove the 'multiple issues' that were marked back in 2011. Thanks in advance." (note the "We"). Shortly afterwards, the maintenance templates were removed by the same editor. 2A00:23C5:50E8:EE01:79FB:BC74:BEDF:FF0C ( talk) 20:06, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Sock- or meatpuppets, adding copyvio or inadequately paraphrased material from the IMGT website. Turned the article from a perfectly serviceable page on the organisation to a sales presentation. 2A00:23C5:50E8:EE01:79FB:BC74:BEDF:FF0C ( talk) 20:12, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Account and IP are likely the same user. Repeatedly turning the article into an advertisement [24] [25] with poorly paraphrased copy-and-pastes from the subject's website and adding alumni with no Wikipedia article. 2A00:23C5:50E8:EE01:79FB:BC74:BEDF:FF0C ( talk) 20:18, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
This IP is currently blocked for a day and a half. They are clearly the subject or their representative, and have turned Nick Jordan (artist) and, to a lesser extent, Jacob Cartwright and Nick Jordan into resumé/advert/lots and lots of extraneous trivial detail pieces. Yesterday they started repeatedly replacing the article with a copyvio sales pitch, which is what got them the 31 hour block. Given they started turning the article in January 2021, I'm pretty sure they will return to it when the block expires, so extra eyes would be useful. 2A00:23C5:50E8:EE01:79FB:BC74:BEDF:FF0C ( talk) 10:20, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
UPE Judokitty ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has added a lot of crap on Mi-Young Park. Please help cleanup this biography. UPE has been commissioned for this task Talk:Craig Kielburger as well. 61.254.242.80 ( talk) 22:16, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
I edit mostly in WP Climbing. A badly written BLP for non-notable climbers Iulia and Delia was turned down at AfC (i saw it when the WikiProj Climbing tag was added). It then reappeared as a more professional article (photo, editing standard etc.) but still non-notable per WP:CLIMBER. The creator of this new-and-improved version User:CharlesBNB was blocked including linked accounts and articles.
It struck me that there is real asymmetry here. Once we know a non-notable BLP/Company has been declined, its reappearance in a very professionalised form (with photo, logo etc,) is likely a UPE, which then links to their wider portfolio of other articles. In fact, a UPE takes a big risk taking on a client who was previously turned down/deleted on Wikipedia, as they could lose all their work?
My question is whether we keep a register/filter of non-notable BLPs/Corps who we know are trying to get on Wikipedia and who may engage the services of a UPE provider, so that we can expose the whole provider? Aszx5000 ( talk) 12:40, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
removed referenced info from Hamza Essalih and turned it into something of a hagiography 92.17.14.64 ( talk) 12:50, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
The below user works for HCL as shown by their edit summary here
— Preceding unsigned comment added by REDACTED403 ( talk • contribs) 13:00:41 (UTC)
This user is variously using Wikipedia to promote her own work and relying on her own original research. She edited the articles for Arcadia Publishing and Castleberry, Alabama to add external links to her book. She also names herself as the author of two of the eight sources she cited in the article she created, Graefenberg Medical Institute. I don't know if the COI noticeboard is the appropriate place for this conversation but I didn't know where else to bring it. Dennis C. Abrams ( talk) 13:50, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
|publisher=
). It is not "original research" in the Wikipedia sense to include something here that one has previously had published elsewhere; we should welcome subject experts who write here neutrally (as indeed I have occasionally done). At the top of this page is "This page should only be used when ordinary talk page discussion has been attempted and failed to resolve the issue"; where did you do that? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:40, 24 April 2024 (UTC)